Tamron AF 28-300

I plan to rent a Tamron AF Lens 28-300 f3.5-6.3 to shoot Air Show mount on Canon 5D. Can I expect a good or at least a decent result from it?

I'm not experienced/educated enough to give you a technical review of the lens but I can tell you that the photos from it are OK at shorter focal lengths. At longer (200mm+) lengths the lens falls off. The photos are pretty soft. If you shoot wide open the photos are very soft.

Why would you rent a consumer all-purpose zoom to put on a full-frame, $3k dSLR? Much better off renting a higher grade, dedicated telephoto zoom...better results, and faster apertures.

I agree with form. Why put a mediocre lens on a 5D, especially if you're renting. Perhaps something like the Canon 100-400L would be better suited to your needs, and would do justice to the 5D.

Thanks darkvibe,form and crm3371. The only reason I would like to rent this lens is because of its size. I like to have a light weight and compact lenses yet without sacrificing the quality (is there such thing?).

Not really.
I owned a Tamron 28-300 and you are quite right that it is quite light weight and compact. It does make a fair do it all walk around lens. While it just wasn't wide enough for me on my 20D it would fare better on a full frame. The Tamron needs LOTS of light. For reasonable sharpness it needs f/8, f/11 is better. I also found that the 300mm was, shall we say, a bit optimistic, more like 260mm to 280mm on the long end.
Form and cm3371 are quite right about putting a mediocre lens on such a nice camera.
If you must have a single light weight, compact lens to do it all then the Tamron 28-300 Xr Di LD could be the lens for you.
If I were going to an air show with a 5D (drool) I would take two lenses, well three, if you count the Kenko 1.4 TC. I would take a 24-105 f/4 L and a 100-400 L

What do you think of Canon EF 70-300 mm F 4.5-5.6 with IS and USM?

Considered a better performer than an all-around lens or any other lens with a 70/75-300mm range, probably, though it also supposedly drops off in sharpness a little towards the long end...perhaps renting "L" glass like the 100-400 would give you better results.

Form is on the right track. I have the EF 70-300 DO IS and love it. It is more compact than the non DO version and has slightly better IQ and terrific IS but it costs TWICE as much.
I know that if I was renting the glass I would go with the 100-400 L and think of it as a test drive for possible future purchase.

I would get the Canon 70-3000 4.5-5.6 IS USM

Skip---

"If I were going to an air show with a 5D (drool) I would take two lenses, well three, if you count the Kenko 1.4 TC....."

Why the Kenko 1.4? Is it superior to the Tamron SP 1.4x? Or will the Tamron 1.4x even function properly with the Tamron 28-300 lens?

Walter

I have no empirical data that the Kenko is superior to the Tamron and I have both (well one is out on loan now ). It is a matter of preference, the Kenko has five elements while the Tamron has four.
I did not have either TC when I had my Tamron 28-300 so I can not answer your question with authority. I do believe that if you run the lens wider than 70mm you risk smacking the rear element into the TC. The best bet if you have the Tamron 28-300 is to take it down to your local camera store that has either TC (Canon TC will NOT work) and test drive it.

Skip Souza wrote:
I have no empirical data that the Kenko is superior to the Tamron and I have both (well one is out on loan now ). It is a matter of preference, the Kenko has five elements while the Tamron has four.
I did not have either TC when I had my Tamron 28-300 so I can not answer your question with authority. I do believe that if you run the lens wider than 70mm you risk smacking the rear element into the TC. The best bet if you have the Tamron 28-300 is to take it down to your local camera store that has either TC (Canon TC will NOT work) and test drive it.

Skip--thanks for the prompt reply about the Kenko

On a separate matter, can you answer a few questions about this forum on my personal email at wegriffin8642@yahoo.co​m?

Thanks again.

Walter